[NSRCA-discussion] "Sick" Lipo Packs

[Ron Van Putte]

Good points Earl.

I thought all balancing systems were equal until I had the recent  
experience of putting three 5S packs together with cells from four  
packs.  It's not surprising that the cells within the packs were at  
several different voltages.  I put each pack on my balancing charger  
and discovered that  some cells were so far away from others that the  
charger's balancing circuit couldn't keep up.  I tried my trusty old  
Blinky balancer and realized that it used such low current that it  
would take a LONG time to get the cells to balance.  Then I tried the  
TME Xtrema Model XTR-BAL balancer.  It must use a lot more current,  
because it gets HOT!  It whipped my packs into balance in short order.

Ron VP

On Dec 5, 2010, at 9:29 AM, ehaury wrote:

> Chris
>
> Thanks for the info - pretty much answer's the puffing question.
>
> Let me add my thoughts / observations as to why things can not be  
> all good with charging / balancing related to pattern packs and the  
> common chargers we use.
>
> So what about "charge abuse"? My observations suggest that  
> balancing equipment doesn't always do what is expected. Many  
> balancers function by drawing charge current away from the high cell 
> (s) which allows the low cells to "catch up". Part of the problem  
> lies with the balancers capacity to divert that charge current -  
> usually 300 - 500mAh - which isn't sufficient when charging at 5A.  
> If the charger primarily terminates on total pack voltage, the high  
> cell(s) are pushed too high until the average reaches the target  
> pack voltage. This will often leave the weak cell low and some too  
> high and won't be noted unless the individual cell voltages are  
> observed. (The way to charge packs packs with large imbalance is at  
> a rate that doesn't exceed the diversion capacity of the balancer -  
> takes time.) On a good note, most systems will terminate charge  
> (with notification) if the high cells are pushed too far - still  
> not good for them (especially without consideration for  
> temperature) but an important safety feature that should prevent  
> charging eruptions as well as providing notification that something  
> isn't right. Then there are chargers that balance by either  
> charging each cell independently or by adding current to the low  
> cells to help them "catch up". This is a good strategy and that  
> appears ideal except for issues with connectors / leads.
>
> A common problem is that both balance methods can be compromised by  
> the balance leads / connectors themselves which can result in the  
> balancer actually misbalancing the pack. The connectors are small  
> and of materials that will oxidize over time. They also tend to  
> lose tension with use. Both the looseness and oxidation results in  
> a poor connection. A marginal connection will prevent the balancer  
> from "seeing" the correct voltage and will become worse as balance  
> current flows. (Ever have a "balance lead not connected" or  
> "incorrect cell count" report - these are indications that the  
> connectors are not doing their job. This all is 10X true if  
> charging at 5A is attempted through these faulty connections!  
> Additionally, the balance leads themselves are small gauge wire of  
> low strand count (not very flexible) which often results in several  
> strands breaking from the connector with use. Eventually the wire  
> might break off - in the meantime it's a resistor in the balancing  
> circuit! I've also seen extensions (have all the same problems)  
> where only a couple of strands were captured in crimping to the  
> connector! The good news is that much of this can be avoided with  
> maintenance and observation. Contact cleaners will help keep the  
> connections clean, the some female connectors can be removed from  
> the housing (one at a time if on the batt) and "bent" back closed  
> when they loosen. Check connections on new leads / extensions and  
> always fix the problem if some lead "wiggling" is needed to make  
> the charger happy.
>
>
> Earl
>
>
>
> ---- Original Message -----
> From: Scott Pavlock
> To: General pattern discussion
> Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2010 7:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] "Sick" Lipo Packs
>
> Chris ,
>
> Great article!
> Were can we find the rest of it.
>
> On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Chris <cjm767driver at hotmail.com>  
> wrote:
> Stu is right, all cells in the pack were subjected to the same  
> overcharge or over discharge and will also fail as the first cell  
> did.  One event will probably not show up as a swelled cell but it  
> is the overcharge / over discharge over many cycles that will  
> result in swelling. Notice the article says that max voltage is  
> temp related, and most chargers don't make this adjustment so even  
> with a "good" balance charger, you can still overcharge.
>
> Chris
>
> Part of a good article:
> This was the common problem with many cheap Chinese LiPos of around  
> 2005-2008. Most are better now, but it's the #1 cause of premature  
> LiPo failure: water contamination in the plant. Many of China's  
> LiPo factories are on the coast, where the altitude is very low and  
> the humidity is high. You can't run the humidity too low on the  
> assembly floor, because you're working with volatile chemicals that  
> could explode in the presence of a spark, and you can't run it too  
> high because then you end up with a worthless LiPo that swells on  
> first use.
>
> Here's the science. You have three ingredients that are functional  
> in a LiPo battery. The rest is wrapping and wiring attachments.
>
> Cathode: LiCoO2 or LiMn2O4
> Separator: Conducting polymer electrolyte
> Anode: Li or carbon-Li intercalation compound
> I'm going to be a little vague in my language here. The chemicals  
> involved vary according to manufacturers, so I don't want to make  
> any assumptions.
>
> Remember your chemistry class? Note the absolute lack of any  
> hydrogen atoms in the reaction. None, zero, zip, nada. If you have  
> water inside your battery -- and virtually all batteries have a  
> little bit -- you've got problems. When the chemical bond of H20 is  
> broken by electrolysis and heat, you end up with free oxygen. You  
> also have free-roaming hydrogen that typically ends up bound to  
> your anode or cathode, whichever side of the reaction it's on and  
> depending on the state of charge of your battery.
>
> Now, this is a pretty unstable situation that's exacerbated by any  
> over-discharge or over-charge condition creating metallic lithium  
> in your cell. The end result is Lithium Hydroxide: 1 atom of  
> lithium, one atom of hydrogen, and one atom of oxygen.
>
> But you still have a free oxygen atom floating around inside the  
> battery casing, that typically combines with one other oxygen atom  
> -- O2, or what we sometimes think of as "air" -- or two other  
> oxygen atoms, to form a characteristic tangy, metallic-smelling  
> substance called "ozone", or O3. Gases expand with heat and  
> contract with cold. Chuck a swollen battery in the freezer and it  
> might come out rock-hard again... until it heats up. It's not  
> frozen, it just got cold enough that the gases inside didn't take  
> up much space at all.
>
> And that free O2 or ozone is just waiting to pounce and oxidize  
> some lithium on the slightest miscalculation on your part. The  
> modest over-discharge during a punch-out, or running the battery a  
> little too low or letting it get a little too hot, or running the  
> voltage up to 4.235v/cell on a cold day when the actual voltage  
> limit per cell is more like 4.1v. All of these create the perfect  
> storm for a puffy battery to quickly turn itself into a ruined  
> battery or an in-flight fire.
>
> Understanding the role of free oxygen in your battery, from water  
> and other causes, is CRUCIAL to understanding why batteries fail,  
> and why sometimes you can get by with flying a puffy battery, and  
> sometimes you can't.
>
> If a Lithium battery is overcharged or charged too quickly, you end  
> up with LOTS of excess free lithium on the anode (metallic lithium  
> plating), and free oxygen on the cathode. A free oxygen atom is  
> small enough to freely traverse the separator without carrying an  
> electric charge, resulting in lithium OXIDE on the anode. Lithium  
> "rust", in reality. Useless to us at this point, just dead weight  
> being carted around inside your battery's wrapper.
> But lithium oxide uses fewer oxygen atoms than existed in the  
> ionized state, so you end up with, again, FREE OXYGEN. And people  
> wonder why if you over-charge a LiPo underwater, it still ignites  
> despite the lack of open air...
>
> If it's over-discharged or discharged too quickly, the reverse is  
> true, but you end up with Lithium Oxide on the cathode, but at a  
> lower rate because there's simply less there. Basically, an abused  
> battery quickly develops corrosion on both poles of the battery  
> inside the wrapper. And the more it's abused, the worse it gets as  
> the resistance goes up and it still gets driven hard.
>
> This, by the way, is the most common cause of swelling today for  
> our aircraft when flown with a high-quality pack (not knock-off  
> eBay leftovers from expensive Chinese mistakes of 2004-2009). The  
> reality is, these kinds of cells, regardless of their 'C' rating,  
> are built for use where they last for several hours... not several  
> minutes. While the chemistry if used as designed is good for  
> thousands of cycles, we're driving them so far out of spec that  
> we're lucky to get hundreds of cycles out of them.
>
> In most cases, too, our batteries are under-specced. If slow- 
> charged and slow-discharged, many of these packs would often hold  
> considerably more mAh than we think they do. That's one of the  
> reasons we get the performance we do from them. Higher-C-rated  
> packs also often introduce gelled electrolyte into the separator,  
> and carbon or phosphorous nano-structures on the anode and cathode  
> mixtures rather than the "pound it out thin and hope it's mixed  
> right" approach used with sheets of anodes & cathodes today.
>
>
>
> On 12/4/2010 8:23 PM, Stuart Chale wrote:
>>
>> Been there done that but my experience is that before long  
>> additional cells will fail and the cycle will continue.   With the  
>> cost of the lower priced packs, ie: Zippy's I would no longer  
>> bother :)
>>
>> On 12/4/2010 6:45 PM, Ron Van Putte wrote:
>>> Those of you who use lithium polymer battery packs to power their  
>>> competition airplanes are familiar with "puffed" packs.  I  
>>> recently had four elderly 5S packs "puff".  We all know that's  
>>> not good, but what I'd like to know is what's actually happening.
>>>
>>> I know it's probably not wise for consumers to take lithium  
>>> polymer packs apart, but that's exactly what I did with four  
>>> packs.  I discovered that in three of the "puffed" packs, only a  
>>> single cell was "puffed".  In the last pack, there were two  
>>> "puffed cells.  I did a little arithmetic and quickly discovered  
>>> that I could make three "unpuffed" packs from the good cells I  
>>> had.  So, I unsoldered the "puffed" cells from the four packs and  
>>> cannibalized one pack to make three 5S packs from what I had  
>>> left.  This process is obviously for the timid or the careless.   
>>> I was careful and had no mishaps.  However, I would suggest that  
>>> anyone who says "Oops" a lot should not attempt doing this.
>>>
>>> The three 5S packs I have left are "rock solid".  Experienced  
>>> electric-pilots will know just what I mean.
>>>
>>> I have flown these packs and they seem to perform just as they  
>>> did in their "youth".
>>>
>>> My questions are:  Why do lithium polymer cells "puff"?  What is  
>>> the likely future of my recovered 5S packs?
>>>
>>> Ron VP
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion